AMD Ryzen 5 3600 vs AMD Ryzen 5 4600G Comparison

Both the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 are six-core, twelve-thread desktop processors built on the same Zen 2 architecture, yet the recorded benchmarks reveal two distinctly different personalities. The 4600G, a Renoir silicon, tends to win in shorter, bursty workloads and math-oriented tasks, while the 3600, a Matisse chip, dominates sustained rendering and physics simulations. The database shows a near-even split, with the 4600G winning 13 head-to-head tests and the 3600 winning 12, making the choice between them a matter of workload rather than raw superiority.

Where Each One Wins

The 4600G claims its victories primarily in the 3DMark suite and PassMark's math and data tests. Across all six 3DMark subtests, from 2 threads to max threads, the 4600G leads by margins between 4.3% and 7.6%. This pattern suggests an advantage in latency-sensitive, short-duration workloads where the chip's higher base clock of 3.70 GHz, versus 3.60 GHz on the 3600, can be leveraged before thermal or power limits come into play. The 4600G also wins PassMark integer math, floating point math, extended instructions, data compression, and random string sorting, with deltas of 4.4%, 4.7%, 5.8%, 5.3%, and 2.3% respectively. These are compute-heavy but memory-light tasks, where the 4600G's smaller 8 MB shared L3 cache does not become a bottleneck.

The 3600, conversely, dominates the Cinebench family across the board. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core, the 3600 wins with deltas ranging from -9.6% to -9.8%. This is a consistent and significant margin, indicating a clear advantage in sustained all-core rendering. The 3600 also wins Geekbench multi-core by 10%, Geekbench single-core by 4.9%, PassMark multi-thread by 9.6%, and PassMark physics by a massive 41.3%. The physics result is particularly striking, suggesting the 3600's larger 32 MB L3 cache is critical for complex simulation workloads. The 3600 also edges out the 4600G in PassMark data encryption by 2.7% and in prime number finding by an enormous 70.4%, where the 4600G scores 32 versus the 3600's 108.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Zen 2 microarchitecture, are fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process, and use the AMD Socket AM4. The similarities, however, mask substantial internal differences. The 4600G, codenamed Renoir, is a monolithic die design with 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die. The 3600, codenamed Matisse, uses a chiplet design with 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. This explains the cache disparity: the 4600G has only 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 3600 has 32 MB, four times as much. Both have 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core.

The integrated graphics also separate them. The 4600G includes Radeon Vega 7, while the 3600 has no integrated graphics at all. This is a fundamental feature difference, as it makes the 4600G a viable option for systems without a discrete GPU. PCIe support also differs: the 4600G provides Gen 3 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 3600 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The newer PCIe standard on the 3600 is notable for future expansion. Memory support is identical in specification, with DDR4, dual-channel, and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and neither supports ECC. Both have unlocked multipliers, a 65 W TDP, and were released as active desktop parts, with the 3600 launching on 2019-07-06 and the 4600G on 2020-07-20.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic single result is PassMark find prime numbers, where the 3600 scores 108 against the 4600G's 32, a delta of -70.4%. This is not a marginal edge but a categorical difference, likely driven by the 3600's much larger L3 cache, which allows it to keep more of the working set in fast memory. Similarly, PassMark physics shows the 3600 at 1152 versus 676, a 41.3% advantage, reinforcing the cache-dependency of simulation workloads.

In contrast, the 4600G's largest win is in 3DMark 8 threads, with a score of 4138 versus 3844, a 7.6% delta. This is a moderate lead, but the 4600G wins every 3DMark test, including single-thread (726 vs 696, 4.3%), 2-thread (1430 vs 1361, 5.1%), 4-thread (2732 vs 2579, 5.9%), 16-thread (4863 vs 4605, 5.6%), and max-threads (4889 vs 4603, 6.2%). The consistency here suggests the 4600G's higher base clock and perhaps better memory latency characteristics give it a real edge in gaming or interactive 3D applications, which are typically bursty and latency-sensitive.

The Cinebench results are uniformly in the 3600's favor, with every test showing a delta between -9.6% and -9.8%. Cinebench R23 multi-core has the 3600 at 15045 versus 13593, and single-core at 2124 versus 1919. These are not small differences; they represent a roughly 10% performance penalty for the 4600G in sustained workloads. Geekbench tells a similar story, with the 3600 winning multi-core by 10% (7372 vs 6637) and single-core by 4.9% (1536 vs 1460). The 4600G, however, wins PassMark single-thread by 3.6% (2653 vs 2562), contradicting the Geekbench single-core result, which indicates the two tests stress different aspects of single-core performance.

The math and compression tests favor the 4600G. PassMark integer math shows 50723 vs 48607, a 4.4% lead, and floating point math shows 29947 vs 28607, a 4.7% lead. Extended instructions are 15280 vs 14442, a 5.8% advantage, and data compression is 231426 vs 219774, a 5.3% lead. Random string sorting is a narrow 2.3% win for the 4600G (24246 vs 23707). These results indicate that for everyday productivity, spreadsheet calculations, and code compilation, the 4600G is often the faster chip, despite its smaller cache.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear workload-based division. The Ryzen 5 4600G is the better choice for users who prioritize integrated graphics, short-burst performance, and math-heavy applications. Its wins in 3DMark and PassMark integer and floating point suggest it will feel snappier in general desktop use, light gaming, and tasks like video encoding that rely on SIMD instructions. It also offers the Radeon Vega 7 iGPU, which is essential for a build without a discrete card.

The Ryzen 5 3600 is the stronger processor for sustained, cache-hungry workloads. Its 10% lead in Cinebench multi-core, 10% lead in Geekbench multi-core, and massive advantages in prime number finding and physics make it the clear pick for 3D rendering, scientific computing, and complex simulations. The 32 MB L3 cache is a decisive factor in these tests, and the PCIe Gen 4 support is a forward-looking feature. For users who already have a discrete GPU and run long all-core jobs, the 3600 is the better investment.

Neither chip is a universal winner. The 4600G wins 13 tests, the 3600 wins 12, and the average benchmark scores are close, with the 4600G at 17507 and the 3600 at 17035. Both sit at the 71st percentile of all CPUs, and their nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE and the Intel Core i3-14100T for the 4600G, and the Intel Core i5-11400 and AMD EPYC 7573X for the 3600. The final decision hinges on whether the user needs the iGPU and burst performance, or the larger cache and sustained throughput.

FAQ

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 4600G have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the 4600G includes Radeon Vega 7, while the Ryzen 5 3600 has no integrated graphics at all.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Ryzen 5 3600 has 32 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ryzen 5 4600G has only 8 MB.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Ryzen 5 3600 scores 15045, which is 9.7% higher than the 4600G's 13593.

Q: Which CPU wins in 3DMark 8 threads?

A: The Ryzen 5 4600G wins, scoring 4138 versus 3844 for the 3600, a 7.6% lead.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, both the 4600G and the 3600 have unlocked multipliers.

Q: Do both CPUs support DDR4 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 with dual-channel memory and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 4600G | AMD Ryzen 5 3600 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Codename | Renoir | Matisse |

| Transistors | 9,800 million | 3,800 million |

| Die Size | 156 mm² | 74 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 32 MB (shared) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 7 | None |

| PCIe Version | Gen 3, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release Date | 2020-07-20 | 2019-07-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $154 | $199 |